Diagnostics
DiagnosticDiagnostics
Providers using this tag (222)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 7 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 15 Limited public surface area
Emerging 73 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 121 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 4 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (63)
Ranked by the provider's API Evangelist rating — the Kin Score is scored per provider, not per API, so every API of a provider shares its band. How the rating works →
Exemplar 7 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 7 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 21 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 13 Limited public surface area
Emerging 9 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 6 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (42)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Diagnostics” but do not classify their business under it. Listed unranked and kept out of the count above, because one tagged operation is not a statement about what a company does.
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
222 providers carry this tag directly, and 224 counting the 2 narrower tags below — 2 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 198 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Diagnostics, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Governance | 4.8 | 6.5 | -1.7 | 198 |
| Discoverability | 56.1 | 61 | -4.9 | 198 |
| Access Clarity | 19.5 | 26.5 | -7 | 198 |
| Operational Transparency | 3.3 | 14 | -10.7 | 198 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 9.8 | 23.4 | -13.6 | 198 |
| Contract Quality | 4.1 | 20.1 | -16 | 198 |
A facet is averaged over the members that carry it, not over the whole cohort — the “Scored” column is that count. Averaging an absent facet as zero would score our own coverage gaps as the providers’ posture.
| Artifact | This cohort | Catalog | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP server (any) | 7% | 10% | -3 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 7% | 13% | -6 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 7% | 11% | -4 |
| Security | 98% | 96% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 2% | -2 |
| Governance rules | 2% | 13% | -11 |
mcp_pct counts any mcp/ artifact including ones API Evangelist derived from the provider OpenAPI; mcp_first_party_pct counts only servers the provider publishes. Prefer the latter.
- 1 Vital 73.9
- 2 Truepill 58.2
- 3 Qure.ai 53.5
- 4 Color 52.6
- 5 LetsGetChecked 50.8
- 6 MyOme 45.9
- 7 Agco 44.4
- 8 Thriva 42.7
- 9 Slingshot Biosciences 39.7
- 10 Elysium Health 35
- 1 Harbinger Health 46.9
- 2 Color 43.7
- 3 Scimar 42.3
- 4 Vital 40.6
- 5 Thriva 40.5
- 6 Slingshot Biosciences 36.2
- 7 Truepill 35
- 8 CarMD 34.4
- 9 LetsGetChecked 34.2
- 10 Orange Health 33.9
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.